Started By
Message
re: "If we counted championships like bammer does" - here's how many your team has
Posted on 6/15/15 at 8:38 pm to Tuscaloosa
Posted on 6/15/15 at 8:38 pm to Tuscaloosa
We went undefeated in 1909, but our local papers didn't award us a title.
This post was edited on 6/15/15 at 8:41 pm
0
Posted on 6/15/15 at 8:40 pm to djsdawg
quote:Bama fell apart after we had some starters suspended due to the textbook bullshite (even though we did beat Tennessee the day the news came out).
Well, bama fell apart after the LSU loss and Uga transformed into a machine after the vandy game.
Posted on 6/15/15 at 10:35 pm to Tuscaloosa
That Moo State pic... 
Upvote sir...
Upvote sir...
Posted on 6/15/15 at 10:43 pm to Tuscaloosa
So South Carolina does not even have a dubious claim. That is sad. We should create a word press at least arguing for one...
SC People, any year you think could be claimed (remember- going by most of those winning your conference or your bowl need not matter)
SC People, any year you think could be claimed (remember- going by most of those winning your conference or your bowl need not matter)
Posted on 6/16/15 at 12:36 am to Tuscaloosa
Love your picture choices for Miss St. and USCe!!!
Posted on 6/16/15 at 12:48 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Auburn - 8 1913 1914 1957 1958 1983 1993 2004 2010
Posted on 6/16/15 at 1:10 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Why don't you people at least claim 1913?
The only other team to have a claim to 1913 is Harvard. Auburn played 8 games, finished 8-0 and gave up only 13 points all year with 6 shut outs. Auburn outscored their opponents 224-13.
Harvard finished 9-0, but only shut out 5 teams, and outscored their opponents 225-21.
The only other team to have a claim to 1913 is Harvard. Auburn played 8 games, finished 8-0 and gave up only 13 points all year with 6 shut outs. Auburn outscored their opponents 224-13.
Harvard finished 9-0, but only shut out 5 teams, and outscored their opponents 225-21.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 1:28 am to Tuscaloosa
Harvard said they would buy our college and close Auburn if we tried it.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 1:53 am to Tuscaloosa
That might have been the greatest Mississippi St. troll of all time. Good job. 
Posted on 6/16/15 at 6:16 am to Tuscaloosa
Man, Bama sucked pre-WWI.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 7:02 am to PeaRidgeWatash
The best part of the entire thread is the very first Barn reply was complaining about the 1941 championship lol.
Identity Crisis at it's finest.
Great job Tuscaloosa.
Identity Crisis at it's finest.
Great job Tuscaloosa.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 7:54 am to CrimsonBoz
back in the '70s or '80s whenever it was that whoever it was that actually started the whole keeping up with the number of championships at bama. when he sat down and started looking at this i have to think he stuck '41 in as a needle to everybody else. you know a 'gotcha' kind of thing. obviously i have no idea nor have i ever seen an interview with him. but seriously, he had to be lol'ing every time he heard a comment about it.
now,to the argument about cfdwh vs ncaa site. if memory serves me right. about 6-7 years ago they went in the ncaa site and deleted a lot of the awarded championships. here again that memory thing, i think the ncaa site basically mirrored the cfdwh site. but somebody didnt like it so it got changed.
to me the only fair way is to include every single awarded nc for every single team. anything other than that means you are picking and choosing which always leads to bias. welp thats my 2cents worth.
to the op, great job man.
now,to the argument about cfdwh vs ncaa site. if memory serves me right. about 6-7 years ago they went in the ncaa site and deleted a lot of the awarded championships. here again that memory thing, i think the ncaa site basically mirrored the cfdwh site. but somebody didnt like it so it got changed.
to me the only fair way is to include every single awarded nc for every single team. anything other than that means you are picking and choosing which always leads to bias. welp thats my 2cents worth.
to the op, great job man.
This post was edited on 6/16/15 at 7:56 am
Posted on 6/16/15 at 9:09 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
Harvard said they would buy our college and close Auburn if we tried it.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 9:14 am to crimsontater
quote:
now,to the argument about cfdwh vs ncaa site. if memory serves me right. about 6-7 years ago they went in the ncaa site and deleted a lot of the awarded championships. here again that memory thing, i think the ncaa site basically mirrored the cfdwh site. but somebody didnt like it so it got changed.
to me the only fair way is to include every single awarded nc for every single team. anything other than that means you are picking and choosing which always leads to bias. welp thats my 2cents worth.
I'm not really sure about the history of the NCAA website. The premise of this thread was based around how everyone jokes about Bama claiming National Championships for anything for any reason (even though 1941 is really the only year we did that for). So, for fun I wanted to compile a list of every selector for every team throughout each team's entire history. For that purpose, CFBDW serves this thread a little better, IMO - because it includes pretty much every random selector imaginable.
quote:
to the op, great job man.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 9:20 am to Tuscaloosa
This is actually a well-done thread, succinctly providing data in a visually easy to read format with some appropriate humor thrown in.
The usual suspects will HATE it though.
The usual suspects will HATE it though.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 9:49 am to elposter
Good thread.
Bama will probably claim this as a National Championship.
Everyone knows some of those claims are outright ridiculous.
However, just like history, if you say something long enough it becomes true whether it is inaccurate or not.
Bama will probably claim this as a National Championship.
Everyone knows some of those claims are outright ridiculous.
However, just like history, if you say something long enough it becomes true whether it is inaccurate or not.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 10:17 am to boogiewoogie1978
Very interesting, thanks for putting that together.
Miss St and South Carolina truly are the Little 2.
Send MSU to the Big 12 for Oklahoma and South Carolina to the ACC for Clemson.
Miss St and South Carolina truly are the Little 2.
Send MSU to the Big 12 for Oklahoma and South Carolina to the ACC for Clemson.
This post was edited on 6/16/15 at 10:19 am
Posted on 6/16/15 at 11:08 am to PurpleandGeauld
Still not as many as Bammer.
Posted on 6/16/15 at 11:21 am to Tuscaloosa
NICE POST
Posted on 6/16/15 at 11:39 am to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
Good thread.
Bama will probably claim this as a National Championship.
Everyone knows some of those claims are outright ridiculous.
However, just like history, if you say something long enough it becomes true whether it is inaccurate or not.
Which ones (outside of the obvious 1941)?
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News